A Toss without a Coin: Information,Discontinuity, and Mathematics in Quantum Theory

The article argues that—at least in certain interpretations, such as the one assumed in this article under the heading of “reality without realism”—the quantum-theoretical situation appears as follows: While—in terms of probabilistic predictions—connected to and connecting the information obtained in quantum phenomena, the mathematics of quantum theory (QM or QFT), which is continuous, does not represent and is discontinuous with both the emergence of quantum phenomena and the physics of these phenomena, phenomena that are physically discontinuous with each other as well. These phenomena, and thus this information, are described by classical physics. All actually available information (in the mathematical sense of information theory) is classical: it is composed of units, such as bits, that are—or are contained in—entities described by classical physics. On the other hand, classical physics cannot predict this information when it is created, as manifested in measuring instruments, in quantum experiments, while quantum theory can. In this epistemological sense, this information is quantum. The article designates the discontinuity between quantum theory and the emergence of quantum phenomena the “Heisenberg discontinuity”, because it was introduced by W. Heisenberg along with QM, and the discontinuity between QM or QFT and the classical physics of quantum phenomena, the “Bohr discontinuity”, because it was introduced as part of Bohr’s interpretation of quantum phenomena and QM, under the assumption of Heisenberg discontinuity. Combining both discontinuities precludes QM or QFT from being connected to either physical reality, that ultimately responsible for quantum phenomena or that of these phenomena themselves, other than by means of probabilistic predictions concerning the information, classical in character, contained in quantum phenomena. The nature of quantum information is, in this view, defined by this situation. A major implication, discussed in the Conclusion, is the existence and arguably the necessity of two—classical and quantum—or with relativity, three and possibly more essentially different theories in fundamental physics.     

No Preferred Reference Frame at the Foundation of Quantum Mechanics

Quantum information theorists have created axiomatic reconstructions of quantum mechanics (QM) that are very successful at identifying precisely what distinguishes quantum probability theory from classical and more general probability theories in terms of information-theoretic principles. Herein, we show how one such principle, Information Invariance and Continuity, at the foundation of those axiomatic reconstructions, maps to “no preferred reference frame” (NPRF, aka “the relativity principle”) as it pertains to the invariant measurement of Planck’s constant h for Stern-Gerlach (SG) spin measurements. This is in exact analogy to the relativity principle as it pertains to the invariant measurement of the speed of light c at the foundation of special relativity (SR). Essentially, quantum information theorists have extended Einstein’s use of NPRF from the boost invariance of measurements of c to include the SO(3) invariance of measurements of h between different reference frames of mutually complementary spin measurements via the principle of Information Invariance and Continuity. Consequently, the “mystery” of the Bell states is understood to result from conservation per Information Invariance and Continuity between different reference frames of mutually complementary qubit measurements, and this maps to conservation per NPRF in spacetime. If one falsely conflates the relativity principle with the classical theory of SR, then it may seem impossible that the relativity principle resides at the foundation of non-relativisitic QM. In fact, there is nothing inherently classical or quantum about NPRF. Thus, the axiomatic reconstructions of QM have succeeded in producing a principle account of QM that reveals as much about Nature as the postulates of SR.     

From Quantum Probabilities to Quantum Amplitudes

The task of reconstructing the system’s state from the measurements results, known as the Pauli problem, usually requires repetition of two successive steps. Preparation in an initial state to be determined is followed by an accurate measurement of one of the several chosen operators in order to provide the necessary “Pauli data”. We consider a similar yet more general problem of recovering Feynman’s transition (path) amplitudes from the results of at least three consecutive measurements. The three-step histories of a pre- and post-selected quantum system are subjected to a type of interference not available to their two-step counterparts. We show that this interference can be exploited, and if the intermediate measurement is “fuzzy”, the path amplitudes can be successfully recovered. The simplest case of a two-level system is analysed in detail. The “weak measurement” limit and the usefulness of the path amplitudes are also discussed.     

Bell Diagonal and Werner State Generation: Entanglement,Non-Locality,Steering and Discord on the IBM Quantum Computer

We propose the first correct special-purpose quantum circuits for preparation of Bell diagonal states (BDS), and implement them on the IBM Quantum computer, characterizing and testing complex aspects of their quantum correlations in the full parameter space. Among the circuits proposed, one involves only two quantum bits but requires adapted quantum tomography routines handling classical bits in parallel. The entire class of Bell diagonal states is generated, and several characteristic indicators, namely entanglement of formation and concurrence, CHSH non-locality, steering and discord, are experimentally evaluated over the full parameter space and compared with theory. As a by-product of this work, we also find a remarkable general inequality between “quantum discord” and “asymmetric relative entropy of discord”: the former never exceeds the latter. We also prove that for all BDS the two coincide.     

Quantum Randomness is Chimeric

If quantum mechanics is taken for granted, the randomness derived from it may be vacuous or even delusional, yet sufficient for many practical purposes. “Random” quantum events are intimately related to the emergence of both space-time as well as the identification of physical properties through which so-called objects are aggregated. We also present a brief review of the metaphysics of indeterminism.     

Quantum Uncertainties and Holism Seem to Render Irrelevant Qudit-Semantics

We consider a semantics based on the peculiar holistic features of the quantum formalism. Any formula of the language gives rise to a quantum circuit that transforms the density operator associated to the formula into the density operator associated to the atomic subformulas in a reversible way. The procedure goes from the whole to the parts against the compositionality-principle and gives rise to a semantic characterization for a new form of quantum logic that has been called “Łukasiewicz quantum computational logic”. It is interesting to compare the logic based on qubit-semantics with that on qudit-semantics. Having in mind the relationships between classical logic and Łukasiewicz-many valued logics, one could expect that the former is stronger than the fragment of the latter. However, this is not the case. From an intuitive point of view, this can be explained by recalling that the former is a very weak form of logic. Many important logical arguments, which are valid either in Birkhoff and von Neumann’s quantum logic or in classical logic, are generally violated.     

Digital Signatures with Quantum Candies

Quantum candies (qandies) represent a type of pedagogical simple model that describes many concepts from quantum information processing (QIP) intuitively without the need to understand or make use of superpositions and without the need of using complex algebra. One of the topics in quantum cryptography that has gained research attention in recent years is quantum digital signatures (QDS), which involve protocols to securely sign classical bits using quantum methods. In this paper, we show how the “qandy model” can be used to describe three QDS protocols in order to provide an important and potentially practical example of the power of “superpositionless” quantum information processing for individuals without background knowledge in the field.     

Wave Node Dynamics and Revival Symmetry in Quantum Rotors

Symmetries and dynamics of wave nodes in space and time expose principles of quantum theory and its relativistic underpinning. Among these are key principles behind recently discovered dephasing and rephasing phenomena known as revivals. A reexamination of basic Eberly revivals, Berry “quantum fractal” landscapes, and the “quantum carpets” of Schleich and co-workers reveals a simple Farey arithmetic and C_n-group revival structure in one of the earliest quantum wave models, the Bohr rotor. These principles may be useful for interpreting modern time-dependent rovibrational spectra. The nodal dynamics of the Bohr rotor is seen to have a quasi-fractal structure similar to that of earlier systems involving chaotic circle maps. The fractal structure is an overlay of discrete versions of Bohr's rotor model. Each N-point Bohr rotor acts like a base-N quantum “odometer” which performs rational fraction arithmetic. Such systems may have applications for optical information technology and quantum computing.     

Contextual Inferences,Nonlocality, and the Incompleteness of Quantum Mechanics

It is known that “quantum non locality”, leading to the violation of Bell’s inequality and more generally of classical local realism, can be attributed to the conjunction of two properties, which we call here elementary locality and predictive completeness. Taking this point of view, we show again that quantum mechanics violates predictive completeness, allowing the making of contextual inferences, which can, in turn, explain why quantum non locality does not contradict relativistic causality. An important question remains: if the usual quantum state ψ is predictively incomplete, how do we complete it? We give here a set of new arguments to show that ψ should be completed indeed, not by looking for any “hidden variables”, but rather by specifying the measurement context, which is required to define actual probabilities over a set of mutually exclusive physical events.     

Wigner’s Friend Scenarios and the Internal Consistency of Standard Quantum Mechanics

Wigner’s friend scenarios involve an Observer, or Observers, measuring a Friend, or Friends, who themselves make quantum measurements. In recent discussions, it has been suggested that quantum mechanics may not always be able to provide a consistent account of a situation involving two Observers and two Friends. We investigate this problem by invoking the basic rules of quantum mechanics as outlined by Feynman in the well-known “Feynman Lectures on Physics”. We show here that these “Feynman rules” constrain the a priori assumptions which can be made in generalised Wigner’s friend scenarios, because the existence of the probabilities of interest ultimately depends on the availability of physical evidence (material records) of the system’s past. With these constraints obeyed, a non-ambiguous and consistent account of all measurement outcomes is obtained for all agents, taking part in various Wigner’s Friend scenarios.     

Rejection of the Light Quantum: The Dark Side of Niels Bohr

Evidence is recalled of the strong opposition of Niels Bohr, at the time of the Old Quantum Theory 1913–1925, to the Lichtquanten hypothesis of Einstein. Some episodes with H. A. Kramers, J. C. Slater, and W. Heisenberg are recollected; Bohr's changing point of view is traced back to some philosophical antecedents and to his endeavor to deduce quantum results from the Correspondence Principle. Some consequences for the future interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, specially to the Complementarity Principle, are considered.     

There Is No Spooky Action at a Distance in Quantum Mechanics

Einstein became bothered by quantum mechanical action at a distance within two years of Schrödinger’s introduction of his eponymous wave equation. If the wave function represents the “real” physical state of a particle, then the measurement of the particle’s position would result in the instantaneous collapse of the wave function to the single, measured position. Such a process seemingly violates not only the Schrödinger equation but also special relativity. Einstein was not alone in this vexation; however, the dilemma eventually faded as physicists concentrated on using the Schrödinger equation to solve a plethora of pressing problems. For the next 30 years, wave function collapse, while occasionally discussed by physicists, was primarily a topic of interest for philosophers. That is, until 1964, when Bell introduced his famous inequality and maintained that its violation proved that quantum mechanics and, by implication, nature herself are nonlocal. Unfortunately, this brought the topic back to mainstream physics, where it has remained and continues to muddy the waters. To be sure, not all physicists are bothered by the apparent nonlocality of quantum mechanics. So where have those who embrace quantum nonlocality gone wrong? I argue that the answer is a gratuitous belief in the ontic nature of the quantum state.     

Does Decoherence Select the Pointer Basis of a Quantum Meter?

The consensus regarding quantum measurements rests on two statements: (i) von Neumann’s standard quantum measurement theory leaves undetermined the basis in which observables are measured, and (ii) the environmental decoherence of the measuring device (the “meter”) unambiguously determines the measuring (“pointer”) basis. The latter statement means that the environment monitors (measures) selected observables of the meter and (indirectly) of the system. Equivalently, a measured quantum state must end up in one of the “pointer states” that persist in the presence of the environment. We find that, unless we restrict ourselves to projective measurements, decoherence does not necessarily determine the pointer basis of the meter. Namely, generalized measurements commonly allow the observer to choose from a multitude of alternative pointer bases that provide the same information on the observables, regardless of decoherence. By contrast, the measured observable does not depend on the pointer basis, whether in the presence or in the absence of decoherence. These results grant further support to our notion of Quantum Lamarckism, whereby the observer’s choices play an indispensable role in quantum mechanics.     

Timelessness Strictly inside the Quantum Realm

Time is one of the undisputed foundations of our life in the real world. Here it is argued that inside small isolated quantum systems, time does not pass as we are used to, and it is primarily in this sense that quantum objects enjoy only limited reality. Quantum systems, which we know, are embedded in the everyday classical world. Their preparation as well as their measurement-phases leave durable records and traces in the entropy of the environment. The Landauer Principle then gives a quantitative threshold for irreversibility. With double slit experiments and tunneling as paradigmatic examples, it is proposed that a label of timelessness offers clues for rendering a Copenhagen-type interpretation of quantum physics more “realistic” and acceptable by providing a coarse but viable link from the fundamental quantum realm to the classical world which humans directly experience.     

A Time-Symmetric Formulation of Quantum Entanglement

I numerically simulate and compare the entanglement of two quanta using the conventional formulation of quantum mechanics and a time-symmetric formulation that has no collapse postulate. The experimental predictions of the two formulations are identical, but the entanglement predictions are significantly different. The time-symmetric formulation reveals an experimentally testable discrepancy in the original quantum analysis of the Hanbury Brown–Twiss experiment, suggests solutions to some parts of the nonlocality and measurement problems, fixes known time asymmetries in the conventional formulation, and answers Bell’s question “How do you convert an ’and’ into an ’or’?”     

On “Decisions and Revisions Which a Minute Will Reverse”: Consciousness,The Unconscious and Mathematical Modeling of Thinking

This article considers a partly philosophical question: What are the ontological and epistemological reasons for using quantum-like models or theories (models and theories based on the mathematical formalism of quantum theory) vs. classical-like ones (based on the mathematics of classical physics), in considering human thinking and decision making? This question is only partly philosophical because it also concerns the scientific understanding of the phenomena considered by the theories that use mathematical models of either type, just as in physics itself, where this question also arises as a physical question. This is because this question is in effect: What are the physical reasons for using, even if not requiring, these types of theories in considering quantum phenomena, which these theories predict fully in accord with the experiment? This is clearly also a physical, rather than only philosophical, question and so is, accordingly, the question of whether one needs classical-like or quantum-like theories or both (just as in physics we use both classical and quantum theories) in considering human thinking in psychology and related fields, such as decision science. It comes as no surprise that many of these reasons are parallel to those that are responsible for the use of QM and QFT in the case of quantum phenomena. Still, the corresponding situations should be understood and justified in terms of the phenomena considered, phenomena defined by human thinking, because there are important differences between these phenomena and quantum phenomena, which this article aims to address. In order to do so, this article will first consider quantum phenomena and quantum theory, before turning to human thinking and decision making, in addressing which it will also discuss two recent quantum-like approaches to human thinking, that by M. G. D’Ariano and F. Faggin and that by A. Khrennikov. Both approaches are ontological in the sense of offering representations, different in character in each approach, of human thinking by the formalism of quantum theory. Whether such a representation, as opposed to only predicting the outcomes of relevant experiments, is possible either in quantum theory or in quantum-like theories of human thinking is one of the questions addressed in this article. The philosophical position adopted in it is that it may not be possible to make this assumption, which, however, is not the same as saying that it is impossible. I designate this view as the reality-without-realism, RWR, view and in considering strictly mental processes as the ideality-without-idealism, IWI, view, in the second case in part following, but also moving beyond, I. Kant’s philosophy.     

Quantum Gravity If Non-Locality Is Fundamental

I take non-locality to be the Michelson–Morley experiment of the early 21st century, assume its universal validity, and try to derive its consequences. Spacetime, with its locality, cannot be fundamental, but must somehow be emergent from entangled coherent quantum variables and their behaviors. There are, then, two immediate consequences: (i). if we start with non-locality, we need not explain non-locality. We must instead explain an emergence of locality and spacetime. (ii). There can be no emergence of spacetime without matter. These propositions flatly contradict General Relativity, which is foundationally local, can be formulated without matter, and in which there is no “emergence” of spacetime. If these be true, then quantum gravity cannot be a minor alteration of General Relativity but must demand its deep reformulation. This will almost inevitably lead to: matter not only curves spacetime, but “creates” spacetime. We will see independent grounds for the assertion that matter both curves and creates spacetime that may invite a new union of quantum gravity and General Relativity. This quantum creation of spacetime consists of: (i) fully non-local entangled coherent quantum variables. (ii) The onset of locality via decoherence. (iii) A metric in Hilbert space among entangled quantum variables by the sub-additive von Neumann entropy between pairs of variables. (iv) Mapping from metric distances in Hilbert space to metric distances in classical spacetime by episodic actualization events. (v) Discrete spacetime is the relations among these discrete actualization events. (vi) “Now” is the shared moment of actualization of one among the entangled variables when the amplitudes of the remaining entangled variables change instantaneously. (vii) The discrete, successive, episodic, irreversible actualization events constitute a quantum arrow of time. (viii) The arrow of time history of these events is recorded in the very structure of the spacetime constructed. (ix) Actual Time is a succession of two or more actual events. The theory inevitably yields a UV cutoff of a new type. The cutoff is a phase transition between continuous spacetime before the transition and discontinuous spacetime beyond the phase transition. This quantum creation of spacetime modifies General Relativity and may account for Dark Energy, Dark Matter, and the possible elimination of the singularities of General Relativity. Relations to Causal Set Theory, faithful Lorentzian manifolds, and past and future light cones joined at “Actual Now” are discussed. Possible observational and experimental tests based on: (i). the existence of Sub- Planckian photons, (ii). knee and ankle discontinuities in the high-energy gamma ray spectrum, and (iii). possible experiments to detect a creation of spacetime in the Casimir system are discussed. A quantum actualization enhancement of repulsive Casimir effect would be anti-gravitational and of possible practical use. The ideas and concepts discussed here are not yet a theory, but at most the start of a framework that may be useful.     

Physics versus Semantics: A Puzzling Case of the Missing Quantum Theory

A case for the project of excising of confusion and obfuscation in the contemporary quantum theory initiated and promoted by David Deutsch has been made. It has been argued that at least some theoretical entities which are conventionally labelled as “interpretations” of quantum mechanics are in fact full-blooded physical theories in their own right, and as such are falsifiable, at least in principle. The most pertinent case is the one of the so-called “Many-Worlds Interpretation” (MWI) of Everett and others. This set of idea differs from other “interpretations” since it does not accept reality of the collapse of Schrödinger’s wavefunction. A survey of several important proposals for discrimination between quantum theories with and without wavefunction collapse appearing from time to time in the literature has been made, and the possibilities discussed in the framework of a wider taxonomy.